alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007269EN.01001701.xml

| 10.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/17

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien (Austria), lodged on 16 July 2007 — Jobra Vermögensverwaltungs-Gesellschaft mbH v Finanzamt Amstetten Melk Scheibbs

(Case C-330/07)

(2007/C 269/33)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Jobra Vermögensverwaltungs-Gesellschaft mbH

Appellant:

Respondent: Finanzamt Amstetten Melk Scheibbs

Respondent:

Question referred

Do the provisions relating to the freedom of establishment (Article 43 EC et seq.) and/or the freedom to provide services (Article 49 EC et seq.) preclude national legislation in force on 31 December 2003 under which the grant to a trader of a tax advantage (investment growth premium) for the acquisition of unused tangible assets is conditional also upon those assets being used exclusively in a domestic place of business, whereas that tax advantage (investment growth premium) is not available for the acquisition of unused tangible assets which are used in a foreign place of business, including, therefore, in a place of business that is located elsewhere in the European Union?

et seq.

---
|   | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: March 14, 2011 | By:           Timothy P. Halter          |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  |  Timothy P. Halter                                                                                                                 |
|                  | Chief Executive and                                                                                                           |
|                  | Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                 |

----
No. 48014

#### Protest 623243-G of Barz & Olkin (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with agreement of counsel that certain of the items consist of 8-bu. paper hats known as harvest hats, similar to those involved in *Caradine v. United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664), the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1504 (b) (5) was sustained.
# C_2007211EN.01000701.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 18 July 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-155/06) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 96/29/Euratom - Protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers from ionising radiation - Failure to transpose fully within the prescribed period)

(2007/C 211/11)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Patakia and D. Lawunmi, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: C. White, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt all the provisions necessary to comply with Article 54 of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ 1996 L 159, p. 1) — Absence of provisions enabling the implementation of all appropriate intervention in all situations leading to lasting exposure resulting from the after-effects of a radiological emergency or a past or old practice or work activity

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | By not adopting, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to allow for appropriate intervention in all situations leading to lasting exposure to ionising radiation resulting from the after-effects of a radiological emergency or a past practice, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 53 of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation; |
| --- | --- |

1.

By not adopting, within the prescribed period, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to allow for appropriate intervention in all situations leading to lasting exposure to ionising radiation resulting from the after-effects of a radiological emergency or a past practice, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 53 of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation;

| 2. | The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 121, 20.5.2006.

1

---
Page 1 of 38Page 2 of 38Page 3 of 38Page 4 of 38Page 5 of 38Page 6 of 38Page 7 of 38Page 8 of 38Page 9 of 38Page 10 of 38Page 11 of 38Page 12 of 38Page 13 of 38Page 14 of 38Page 15 of 38Page 16 of 38Page 17 of 38Page 18 of 38Page 19 of 38Page 20 of 38Page 21 of 38Page 22 of 38Page 23 of 38Page 24 of 38Page 25 of 38Page 26 of 38Page 27 of 38Page 28 of 38Page 29 of 38Page 30 of 38Page 31 of 38Page 32 of 38Page 33 of 38Page 34 of 38Page 35 of 38Page 36 of 38Page 37 of 38Page 38 of 38
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION

JESUS M. SILVA, 

Petitioner, CASE NO. 2:11-CV-671

 JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

v. MAGISTRATE JUDGE E.A. PRESTON DEAVERS

ROBIN KNAB, WARDEN, 

Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER

On April 24, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation

recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be

dismissed as barred by the one-year statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Petitioner has

filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 

Petitioner argues that his motion for leave to file a second appeal tolled the running of the

statute of limitations, because he argued that his sentence was void, and his appeal therefore should

have been addressed by the state appellate court under Ohio law. Petitioner complains that the

Magistrate Judge merely “rubber stamped” the decision of the Ohio Court of Appeals. Objections,

at 4. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review. For the reasons

detailed in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Petitioner’s objections, Doc. 15, are

OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action

is hereby DISMISSED as time-barred. 

Case: 2:11-cv-00671-GCS-EPD Doc #: 12 Filed: 06/04/12 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ George C. Smith 

GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

2

Case: 2:11-cv-00671-GCS-EPD Doc #: 12 Filed: 06/04/12 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND TRUST CORPUS AS OF MAR-31-1997 AND THE
STATEMENT OF DISTRIBUTABLE INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MAR-31-1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,914,101
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,914,101
<PP&E>                                      28,267,655
<DEPRECIATION>                              27,356,651
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,825,105
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          736,735
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     911,004
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,825,105
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,136,735
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               400,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                736,735
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   736,735
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .155
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .155
        

</TABLE>
No. 56546.

protests 172135-K and 173214-K (New York).

#### Franco American Novelty Co., Inc., and John Wanamaker, N. Y. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

The protests were dismissed.
EXHIBIT 12.2
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of China Xiniya Fashion Limited (the
Company);
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;
 4.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this report is being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and
 (c)
    
    Disclosed in this annual report any change in the Companys internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Companys internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The Companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the
audit committee of the Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the Companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and
 (b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Chee Jiong NgName:
    Chee Jiong NgTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
February 7, 1957

Reap. Dec. 8751.

#### Daniel *F. Young, Inc. (Perfection Import & Export Co.)*v. *United States.*

Entered at New York, N. Y. Decided January 10, 1957. [Not published.] Motion by plaintiff.
Exhibit 32.1

SUNLINK HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of SunLink Health Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert M. Thornton, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



By:

/s/ Robert M. Thornton, Jr.Robert M. Thornton, Jr.Chief Executive Officer


May 15, 2006
July 10th, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

RE: Amendment to Exemption 11426 issued pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in Regulatory Docket

NO. FAA-2015-0173

Dear Sir or Madam:

Alaska Aerial Media LLC. was issued an Exemption numbered 11426 (hereinafter the Exemption) for the purpose of aerial cinematography and videography, as well as implementation of emergency use UAS systems with public entities. Alaska Aerial Media requests an amendment to the exemption to allow for The ability to offer training and ground school to persons individually or belonging to both private and/or public organizations that have interests in the use and application of a UAS for the purpose of the safe operation of a UAS to enhance the safety of the National Airspace System (NAS) as well as for the protection of the persons and property. Training to be conducted on (4) types of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that have have been previously amendment to our current 333 exemption.

Alaska Aerial Media LLC. wishes to operate the DJI Inspire 1 Quad Copter, DJI s800 Hexacopter, DJI s1000 Octocopter and the Sensefly eBee RTK fixed wing under the same conditions contained in the current exemption for training & ground School.

Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions concerning this request for amendment to the Exemption.

Sincerely,

Ryan P. Marlow

Alaska Aerial Media 7960 Upper OMalley Road Anchorage Alaska 99507 Tele: (907)-717-9794
Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 1 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 2 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 3 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 4 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 5 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 6 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 7 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 8 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 9 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 10 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 11 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 12 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 13 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 14 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 15 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 16 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 17 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 18 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-00410-JLG-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/06/12 Page: 19 of 19  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-11T21:24:03-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Eastern Division 

MOUMAR DIALLO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

SECRETARY JANET CASE NO. C2-11-536

NAPOLITANO, et al., JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE NORAH MCCANN KING

Defendants.

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have

been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

Decision by Court. A decision has been rendered by the Court without a hearing or

trial.

Pursuant to the ORDER filed February 6, 2012, JUDGMENT is hereby entered

DISMISSING this action.

Date: February 6, 2012 JAMES BONINI, CLERK

/S/ Andy F. Quisumbing 

(By) Andy F. Quisumbing

 Courtroom Deputy Clerk

Case: 2:11-cv-00536-EAS-NMK Doc #: 7 Filed: 02/06/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
EXHIBIT 31.1







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Wei Shi, certify that:





1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Toyota Auto Receivables 2010-A Owner Trust (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);




2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;




3.   Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;




4.   Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and





5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.





In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on the information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:  Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as indenture trustee of the issuing entity, and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as owner trustee of the issuing entity.
















March 27, 2012
By: /S/ WEI SHIWei ShiPresidentToyota Auto Finance Receivables LLC, as Depositor(Senior officer in charge of securitization of thedepositor)






- 10 -
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Joseph B. Guerrero, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sunergy, Inc. for
      the period ended June 30, 2009 (the "Report") fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
|(2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of Sunergy, Inc.                                                                

Dated: August 25, 2009



| | /s/
      Joseph B. Guerrero 
| | -----------------------------
| | Joseph B. Guerrero           
| | Title: President and Director
| | Principal Executive Officer  
| | Sunergy, Inc.                



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Sunergy, Inc.
and will be retained by Sunergy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
United States Steel Corporation – Keetac

Response to U. S. EPA Section 114 Request

April 24, 2012

Item 11

For the time period January 1, 2002, to the date of receipt of this letter, provide all

documentation, including engineering studies or mass balance studies, conducted to

determine emissions of NOX from each waste-gas stack at all indurating furnaces at

the facility.

Person(s): that provided information used or considered in responding to the question or 

were consulted in the preparation of the response:

Stephani Campbell, Chrissy Bartovich

Answer: Included in this submittal are portions from the Class I Modeling Report prepared for 

the permitting of the proposed expansion line at Keetac. Although the report was required as 

part of the permitting for the new line, it does include background information on the existing 

Phase II line at Keetac and associated emission factors utilized and their basis. Also included is 

a technical memo comparing actual CEMS data against a predictive equation dated July 30, 

2010.
Case: 2:11-cv-00076-GCS-NMK Doc #: 7 Filed: 03/31/11 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>